[MUSIC] The second example I'm going to talk briefly around is that it's more of an old world company. It's a coffee company, a coffee chain called Costa. Starbucks is the world's biggest coffee chain. Costa is the second biggest. Much bigger in Europe than it is in North America. Now it's something like 2 billion Pounds a year in sales. And the story I want to briefly recount is their development of a third generation vending machine. You can see an image of this new machine here. It was called Project Marlow. And I don't know if it looks any different to you looking at this image but it's, it's a beautiful machine, it was designed by Pininfarina. The guys who designed Ferrari cars in Italy. When you approach this machine it turns out that it, it gives off the smells and sounds of a coffee shop. And it's got an enormous screen, a touch screen where you can choose your, choose your, your, your preferred beverage. It is a beautiful machine and it was developed in about nine months flat using a team of people who were not even employees of Costa. Now, again, the story is online for you to read, in detail but the essence of the story is this. Costa were excited about the prospect of creating a groundbreaking new machine. Why? Because they realized there were tens of thousands of locations, where they couldn't put a traditional coffee shop. Where they could put a really nice machine, in hospitals and in office buildings, and so forth. And by designing something really quickly, they would steal a march on their competitors, like Starbucks. So they actually entrusted the development of this thing to a separate team, all people working, as they say, outside the former boundaries of Costa on double-quick time. The guy running it, his name is Eric Achtmann. Used to work in the, in the Phantom Works which is a, a sort of a special kind of skunk works operation within a, with, within a defense industry company. He created, created this model whereby everybody worked for him in super-quick time, without any formal contracts being signed and with the idea that they would all essentially get a share of the success in the things. So it wasn't about defining detailed contracts. It was about creating a team who were in it kind of for the fun and excitement of creating something in double-quick time. So again, he didn't focus on money. He focused on getting people excited about a project for its own sake. You can read the details in the case study online. Suffice it to say that it's a kind of a more of an old world example of trying to tap into these alternative drivers of discretionary effort. So to summarize this segment, we talked about the different drivers of motivation. The first point to be clear on, there's three kind of basic summary points. The first is that we see every company, to some degree, trying to tap into these different sources of motivation. It's a very rare company today who only focus on the purely extrinsic side of things. Fortunately, both social changes in terms of the, the emerging generation of employees, we sometimes call them Gen Y or Millennials, and also in terms of technology. Both of these trends are making it easier for us to tap into some of the more non-traditional intrinsic drivers of motivation. And we will say much more about that in, in the next segment. The second point to make, though, is that motivation works at two levels. We can work at the level of the individual boss/subordinate relationship, and we can work at the level of the company as a whole. Think back to when I talked about the personal drivers of motivation. Then go back to what I said about how to make work interesting. It's an awful lot about making the job itself on a day-to-day basis fun. And, of course, the only way to do that is to have a boss who gives you the freedom to do that job well. So, an awful lot of what I've been saying here doesn't come down to the company as a whole. It actually comes down to the, the boss being thoughtful about designing work at a very micro-level to make it intrinsically interesting for the employees who work directly for him or her. So there's a boss/subordinate level of analysis here, but then there's also the organizational level of analysis. Which is to say, can we deri, design a set of systems that essentially help to make the work interesting by, by providing, for example, evaluation metrics? Performance evaluation tools and ultimately bonuses that are aligned to some of these more intrinsic drivers. And if they if the reward systems are all aligned around delivering results and you say you want people to behave in a new way, perhaps be more trusting, don't be surprised if that misalignment creates problems. The third and final point I'll make is that, whilst we understand fully the kind of the concepts of moving towards these more intrinsic drivers, and one of the biggest bottlenecks, one of the biggest barriers, is simply the status quo. The fact is that, you know, when I talk in private to senior bankers they will admit that they are overpaid. They will admit that the banking industry is basically paying people more money than they deserve. But, of course, that doesn't help because as soon as one bank starts paying at a lower level, then they just lose their best people to the ones who are still paying at a higher level. So even though they understand what has to happen, these banking salaries have to kind of equilibrate with salaries from other professions. You know, no one bank is ever going to break ranks. It's a systemic problem and that's one of the biggest reasons why actually we don't see such a shift to the, to the right side in the terms of these alternative principles.
